Second Life looks...tacky

[Suspiria Finucane]

---

Ceka Cianci wrote:

by using the OP's logic..the majority of SL are wearing this today =)

because it's number one..

The new Jersey shore look

---

Bingo!

[Tari Landar]

---

Charli Infinity wrote:

majority are wearing those that's why they're the best seller

---

Man I shouldn't even be here today..

Sorry, had to randomly say that...back on point..

I do believe that what others might be trying to say, and perhaps arne't conveying it in a way you'll understand, is that what appears to be best seller today on the mp does not necessarily represent as large of a majority as you believe it might. Wow that was a huge run on sentence there. Go me.

What is best seller today, may not be best seller tomorrow. In fact, I know that's the case because I frequently do searches on mp for all sorts of things, and the best selling is forever changing. Yes some will remain for a bit, maybe forever, but not all will. Aside from that the Mp only represents a teeny tiny piece, portion, grouping, I'm not sure what word I'm supposed to use here....of sl. The stuff that comes up as best selling on mp, might be worse selling, if you add in sales from inworld. So what looks to be in one place, probably isn't in another. This is especially true for mp vs inworld. In can only say this with any amount of confidence because I've done a lot of leg work in both areas. I've done a lot of searching. I've done a lot of ... dear god let me please just look away...as well as dear god that's gorgeous.

Does that make it any clearer? Probably not, I'm awful at explaining things sometimes. Or maybe you just want to vent about something you dislike. In which case, you really don't need an explanation at all. And that's cool too. For me. Probably not for others, but I don't speak for them, just me.

I do occasionally find it ironic some things are listed as best selling on the mp when I've done all kinds of research and leg work and stuch only to find that those best sellers are actually a lot harder to come by randomly inworld. One would think that not to be the case, but it surely is. At least for a lot of things I've searched. Of course fashion isn't one of those things, so I could be talking out my butt on that one too, hard to say.

Or I could be a figment of your imagination and not really here...Ok, I'm a figment of my own imagination and I like pretending I'm not here...And I like my pain meds when they kick in..air stops hurting..Yes, air hurts, it's touching me and won't leave me alone.

 

[Trinity Yazimoto]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

---

Trinity Yazimoto wrote:

---

Charli Infinity wrote:

I'm not new and I have found some that are more creative What I do see is that majority of SL does prefer this tacky look.

---

yes, and this is exactly the same in RL. if the average pp in rl had a good taste, we should be aware already...

Ill be the first to complain with you about the society we are living in... but you cant condamn SL for being a mirror of RL... SL is made by pp from RL, it cant be so different.

i would deplore that LL doesnt care more what new residents see at first... but well.. this is not the only thing i would deplore from LL (the list is long). And again.... these tacky pp have the same rights than you and me to exist in RL and SL...If they enjoy the tacky style, they are welcome to do... without me... but in this case its my pb to find other style i enjoy better. 

So leave the tacky pp to the style their enjoy, give them rights to exist and find your style and enjoy it. Noone is able to judge and say one style has more rights to exist than other one. And if you happen to see things that annoy your look, you still can derender them (with Firestorm viewer) and so not being annoyed anymore. This is called "Tolerance". IMHO its a must for everyone.

---

Hi Trinity and *HUGS* :matte-motes-smile:  Based on the OPs last response to you as well as to other posts that suggest where other styles are present, at this point I think he's just complaining to be complaining. 

---

Hi Czari and hugs back. and yes, i agree with you about the OP. i guess s/he s just a troll wanting to catch some attention.... im so sorry i dont have time for baby sitting these days so i cant hold his/her hand... :smileywink:

[Phil Deakins]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

Phil, I think I know the version by Nina and Frederik, but can't find it online.

:-(

---

Steuth! I wouldn't have thought that all those people recorded that song. I only knew it by Nina and Frederick. It was popular by them back then. I think I said it was in the 50s but, on reflection, I now think it was the early 60s.

I've just had a look at the Wikipedia page about them and Little Boxes isn't mentioned. I'm sure it was them though. The only one in your list that it could have been at that time is Pete Seeger, who I think was also around then. Little antique grey cells, that have been lying dormant for decades, are beginning to open their blurry eyes and I'm now thinking that Nina and Fred's Little Boxes was on an EP and probably not released as a single. I'm getting a vague memory of the EP's cover.

So I'm now persuading myself that Pete Seeger probably did the main (original) version at that time, and that Nina and Fred did it on an EP (that I now think I remember) and, no doubt, on an LP as well. I'll add that I think that 'Listen To The Ocean' and 'Sucu Sucu' were on the same EP. I saw those songs listed in the Wikipedia page and I do remember them well enough, although, unlike 'Little Boxes', I can't sing the tunes in my head.

ETA: 16's post, following yours, suggests that it may have been released as a single, but I feel sure now that my memory of it is on an EP. It's a long time ago and when the little grey cells lay dormant for so long, they can become corrupted

[Phil Deakins]

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

---

Leia36 wrote:

Oh the irony :smileylol:

---

 

  They must have picked up on the tan skin discussion!

---

There was mention of skin tan near the top of that page and there may have been more mentions of it lower down. The ad system that provides the ads provides contextual ads, so it's expected that the ads are 'relevant' to the page they are on. Contextual ads are brilliant for earning money from

[Qie Niangao]

---

Contextual ads are brilliant for earning money from

---

Except for the advertiser.  No finer snake oil has ever been sold.

[Marigold Devin]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

---

Leia36 wrote:

Oh the irony :smileylol:

---

 

  They must have picked up on the tan skin discussion!

---

There was mention of skin tan near the top of that page and there may have been more mentions of it lower down. The ad system that provides the ads provides contextual ads, so it's expected that the ads are 'relevant' to the page they are on. Contextual ads are brilliant for earning money from

---

It does seem quite ironic how the ads are picked and place. I'm getting ads for love and holidays! I know I need a holiday, but how does my computer know this, when I haven't been googling or anything for holidays?

And even if I was made single today, I would not be looking for a new "love"/valentine or anything else.

 

[Phil Deakins]

---

Qie Niangao wrote:

---

Contextual ads are brilliant for earning money from

---

Except for the advertiser.  No finer snake oil has ever been sold.

---

On the contrary. If advertisers can place their ads on relevant webpages, then the person viewing the page is more likely to be interested in the ads. It's a win all round.

[Perrie Juran]

 

it is that time of year

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

I'm wrong and you are just a troll.  As evidence, I find it very funny that your profile is completely void of anything personal and you have no picture of yourself.  Yet in your groups you belong to  "I <3 The Starlust - The Starlust Motel, where the entrance is almost always in the rear. The Starlust Motel: We're not what you were hoping for, this morning. The Starlust Motel: We Aim to Make you Slightly Uncomfortable "  The group logo is a picture of Elvis as the Sacred Heart of Jesus.  AND THAT'S NOT TACKY????? 

....enough said.

---

That could explain why the OP is embarrassed to show SL to his/her family.  I had been thinking at times in this thread: "Methinks thou protesteth too much." 

(Love the laughing smiley!)

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Charli Infinity wrote:

Yes I am insecure about admiting SL in RL did you guys even read my first post? The a bunch of people jumped on me for posting like you are doing now.

---

This is your first post:

Do you ever get that feeling? I go on to the marketplace and the impression I get is that Second Life is the Jersey shore of the internet. That tacky jersey shore look everywhere..Female avatars: tanned skin, tacky revealing clothes (always with cleavage), dark eye makeup and male avatars: muscular six pack, also very tan and sometimes greasy, and shirt unbuttoned too low.  Then there are the tattoos and piercings that just makes it look even more tacky. Tattoos and piercing can be tasteful but the most of avatars with them just look tacky or emo.

I admit I embarrassed to say I play second life to anyone in real life because of this reason. Everyone will just think I have one of those tacky avatars **Only uploaded images may be used in postings**://secondlife.i.lithium.com/html/assets/emoticons/mattemotes/sour.png" border="0" alt=":matte-motes-sour:" title="" />

(Bolding mine)

You didn't say you were "insecure," you said you were "embarrassed."  Insecure people may become embarrassed more easily than others, but the two words are not synonomous.  So no, you did not tell us you were insecure.

And I still say if you are embarrassed to tell others you "play" SL, then don't tell them or find a less tacky place to hang out.  Simple really.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Charli Infinity wrote:

Female avatars: tanned skin, tacky revealing clothes (always with cleavage), dark eye makeup

male avatars: muscular six pack, also very tan and sometimes greasy, and shirt unbuttoned too low. 

---

I quoted your descriptions of "tacky" from your first post, and I'm curious. What is it about those 'attributes' that you find tacky?

Females: A tanned skin doesn't imply tacky to me, and neither does showing some cleavage. Dark eye makeup doesn't either. They are all absolutely common, so what makes them tacky in your eyes?

Males: A muscular tummy is tacky? A sun tan is tacky? A sweaty body is tacky? And an unbuttoned shirt is tacky? Explain please.

From what you've written, a bikini clad girl on a beach is tacky. And a guy who works out and spends time in the sun is tacky. I can't believe that you mean both of those things so what exactly do you mean by "tacky"?

[Trinity Yazimoto]

hum Phil .....

while you are here... id like you define too the librarian look you seem to know so well when you say this in the first page of this thread : ". It didn't surprise me that my friend's avatar was suddenly dressed a lot like a librarian for that demo "
As you know already, im librarian in rl... so since i wasnt aware there was a special look for librarians (and fortunately, noone here said its a tacky style, phew !), i think i have to know what about this style so...

i really need it Phil, for knowing how i will have to dress tom before going at work (because yes, sadly, librarians are working on saturday... i hope this is not tacky either btw :smileywink:)

im just curious to know, Phil, and this is so more interesting for me than the moans of a troll, that i hope you'll be kind enough to explain to me :smileyhappy:

if you dont, Phil, you have to know that  you'll be guilty if, by chance, im going to work in my library with a tacky look tomorrow.... i wont never forgive you for this.... neither all the pp who will come in my library tomorrow, i guess....

PS : Hugs Phil

[Qie Niangao]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Qie Niangao wrote:

---

Contextual ads are brilliant for earning money from

---

Except for the advertiser.  No finer snake oil has ever been sold.

---

On the contrary. If advertisers can place their ads on relevant webpages, then the person viewing the page is more likely to be interested in the ads. It's a win all round.

---

You know, there's blessed little data to support that. It is the accepted truth, it sounds ever so reasonable, and it forms the very basis of 90% of Google's entire vast revenue stream (and many other business models), but the whole thing is based on so little empirical evidence that it's very possible it could all come crashing down one day.

This doesn't stop me from owning Google stock, mind, but it's based more on the Greater Fool theory than on any real confidence in the value of targeted advertising on the web.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Qie Niangao wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Qie Niangao wrote:

---

Contextual ads are brilliant for earning money from

---

Except for the advertiser.  No finer snake oil has ever been sold.

---

On the contrary. If advertisers can place their ads on relevant webpages, then the person viewing the page is more likely to be interested in the ads. It's a win all round.

---

You know, there's blessed little data to support that. It is the accepted truth, it sounds ever so reasonable, and it forms the very basis of 90% of Google's entire vast revenue stream (and many other business models), but the whole thing is based on so little empirical evidence that it's very possible it could all come crashing down one day.

This doesn't stop me from owning Google stock, mind, but it's based more on the Greater Fool theory than on any real confidence in the value of targeted advertising on the web.

---

It's based on very sound evidence, which is that, if I wanted to place my ad for, say, a bed and breakfast establishment, on a webpage, I'd rather place it on a webpage where people are looking for things like holidays, vacations, accommodation, b&b, guesthouses, etc. than on one that's about the price of gold or online gambling. Very sound evidence indeed

You may be right that there is little data to support what I said, but you don't know. There may be very little generally known data but that doesn't mean that companies haven't done extensive testing. AND... I know of no data to support your 'snake oil' idea

[Phil Deakins]

A female librarian should wear a skirt that's well below the knee and preferably tweed, and a blouse that's buttoned either to the top or to one button down from the top. She must never wear high heels. Flat, or nearly flat shoes are a must, of course, and preferably brown or black.

I hope that helps, Trinity

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

A female librarian should wear a skirt that's well below the knee and preferably tweed, and a blouse that's buttoned either to the top or to one button down from the top. She must never wear high heels. Flat, or nearly flat shoes are a must, of course, and preferably brown or black.

I hope that helps, Trinity

---

You forgot the glasses, they must be a bit pointy... and the librarian strap that dangles from them when worn and that they dangle from when not.

It's all about the glasses, Phil.

Oh, and the eyes!

There is the "peer over" which is necessary for people who cough more than once, and the "glare at" for people who talk above a whisper.

It's all about the glasses and the eyes.

And maybe a pearl necklace if she's a hottie.

Yeah, it's all about the glasses, and the eyes, and the pearl necklace.

... goes off to fan herself.

[Trinity Yazimoto]

raaaaaa, im stuck for tomorrow so !

i dont have any tweed skirts.... and i hate tops buttoned to the top, it seems to me someone is strangling me...

but im fine for the shoes.. bec of ankle problems i now can only wear flat ankle boots. So well... ill go naked and just wearing my ankle boots so...(btw i have both colors : brown and black, so im totally fine for this...). I guess the public in my library tom will appreciate your help then...:smileywink:

(well if someone ask, ill, of course, say its because of you then)

ps : you seem to not go too much in library those days, no ? ive never seen any librarian in my surrounding dressed with a tweed dress btw... 

[Trinity Yazimoto]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

A female librarian should wear a skirt that's well below the knee and preferably tweed, and a blouse that's buttoned either to the top or to one button down from the top. She must never wear high heels. Flat, or nearly flat shoes are a must, of course, and preferably brown or black.

I hope that helps, Trinity

---

You forgot the glasses, they must be a bit pointy... and the librarian strap that dangles from them when worn and that they dangle from when not.

And there is also the "peer over" which is necessary for people who cough more than once, and the "glare at" for people who talk above a whisper.

It's all about the glasses, Phil.

And the eyes.

It's all about the glasses and the eyes.

And maybe a pearl necklace if she's a hottie.

Yeah, it's all about the glasses, and the eyes, and the pearl necklace.

... goes off to fan herself.

---

arg.. you said it.. i was glad he didnt mentioned the glasses... 

well... i always use my sunglasses outside, till the door of the library...

then, since i start to get a bit old, i now, since recently, need some glasses to see sometimes from closer. Not always, but i keep the 2 glasses pair above my hair..

So its ok, naked, with glasses and ankle boots so :smileywink:

ps : for the pearl necklace... im sorry, but librarians are not paid enough for afford any pearl necklaces, so we ll say im not hottie so.:smileyvery-happy:

[Dillon Levenque]

The pearls and the pointy glasses reminded me of this picture of a friend who has not been inworld in many moons. Sort of a compromise—she was wearing heels, and the dress is too short to meet Phil's standards—between your suggestions and his.

Call it 'The Librarian's Night Out'.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

A female librarian should wear a skirt that's well below the knee and preferably tweed, and a blouse that's buttoned either to the top or to one button down from the top. She must never wear high heels. Flat, or nearly flat shoes are a must, of course, and preferably brown or black.

I hope that helps, Trinity

---

You forgot the glasses, they must be a bit pointy... and the librarian strap that dangles from them when worn and that they dangle from when not.

It's all about the glasses, Phil.

Oh, and the eyes!

There is the "peer over" which is necessary for people who cough more than once, and the "glare at" for people who talk above a whisper.

It's all about the glasses and the eyes.

And maybe a pearl necklace if she's a hottie.

Yeah, it's all about the glasses, and the eyes, and the pearl necklace.

... goes off to fan herself.

---

Oh yes. I forgot about those bits. Silly me.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Trinity Yazimoto wrote:

raaaaaa, im stuck for tomorrow so !

i dont have any tweed skirts.... and i hate tops buttoned to the top, it seems to me someone is strangling me...

but im fine for the shoes.. bec of ankle problems i now can only wear flat ankle boots. So well... ill go naked and just wearing my ankle boots so...(btw i have both colors : brown and black, so im totally fine for this...). I guess the public in my library tom will appreciate your help then...:smileywink:

(well if someone ask, ill, of course, say its because of you then)

ps : you seem to not go too much in library those days, no ? ive never seen any librarian in my surrounding dressed with a tweed dress btw... 

---

You're right - It's been a few years since I was in a library. But I did say "preferably tweed". I didn't say that tweed is mandatory.

[Phil Deakins]

She'd never get a job as a librarian, I'm afraid. The glasses are good but that's all.

[Dillon Levenque]

Wow, you're a stickler, aren't you?:smileyhappy:

[Perrie Juran]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

She'd never get a job as a librarian, I'm afraid. The glasses are good but that's all.

---

Would the clerk at the pet shop work for you instead?